| Literature DB >> 35443621 |
Jun Arai1, Yumi Otoyama2, Ken-Ichi Fujita3, Kaku Goto4, Masayuki Tojo2, Atsushi Katagiri2, Hisako Nozawa2, Yutaro Kubota5, Takehiro Takahashi6, Hiroo Ishida7, Takuya Tsunoda5, Natsumi Matsumoto3, Keita Ogawa8, Ryo Nakagawa8, Ryosuke Muroyama8, Naoya Kato8, Hitoshi Yoshida2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of regorafenib on soluble MHC class I polypeptide-related sequence A (MICA) (sMICA) level in vitro. In addition, we clinically examined whether its plasma levels were associated with regorafenib activity in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with CRC.Entities:
Keywords: Colorectal Cancer; MHC class I polypeptide-related sequence A; Natural killer cell; Regorafenib
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35443621 PMCID: PMC9019943 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09512-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.638
Fig. 1Knockdown of ADAMs and MMPs in human CRC cells. A HCT116 and HT29 cells were transfected with siADAM9, siADAM10, siADAM17, siADAM21, siMT1-MMP, siMMP2, siMMP9, or siCtrl; cell viabilities were determined by the CCK8 assay. B In HCT116 and HT29 cells, sMICA levels were determined by ELISA. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.005. Error bars represent standard error of the mean. Representative data from three independent experiments with consistently similar results are shown
Fig. 2Regorafenib and its metabolites, M2 and M5, inhibited sMICA release in CRC cells. A HCT116 and HT29 cells were treated with regorafenib for 48 h. Cell viabilities (left panels) and sMICA levels (right panels) were determined by the CCK8 assay and ELISA, respectively. B HCT116 and HT29 cells were treated with M2 and M5 for 48 h. Cell viabilities (left panels) and sMICA levels (right panels) were determined by the CCK8 assay and ELISA, respectively. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.005. Error bars represent standard error of the mean. Representative data from three independent experiments with consistently similar results are shown. Reg: regorafenib
The characteristics of participants
| responders | non-responders | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 68 (50–77)a | 68 (50–77)a | 64.5 (63–74) | n.s |
| Gender | ||||
| Male/female | 10/7 (59/41) | 4/4 | 6/3 | n.s |
| PS | ||||
| 0/1 | 9/8 (53/47) | 4/4 | 5/4 | n.s |
| Total bilirubin (mg/dL) | 0.7 (0.1–1.2)a | 0.7(0.1–1.1) | 0.7(0.4–1.2) | n.s |
| Serum creatinin (mg/dL) | 0.69 (0.51–1.04)a | 0.76 (0.51–1.04) | 0.61 (0.51–1) | n.s |
| eGFR (mL/min) | 80 (55.4–117.8)a | 74.4 (55.4–89.6) | 85.2 (57.1–117.8) | n.s |
| Histology | ||||
| Well/moderately/poor,mucinous | 7/9/1 (41/53/6) | 4/4/0 | 3/5/1 | n.s |
| Metastatic sites | ||||
| Liver/lung/peritoneum/lymph node | 11/9/2/4 (65/53/12/24) | 4/7/0/1 | 7/2/2/2 | n.s |
| Treatment lines | ||||
| 2/3/4/5 | 1/9/6/1 (6/53/35/6) | 0/5/2/1 | 1/4/4/0 | n.s |
Treatment lines, The number of treatment lines before regorafenib
eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; PS, ECOG performance status
aMedian (range)
Fig. 3sMICA levels in CRC patients compared between responders and non-responders. A sMICA levels were compared between responders (N = 8) and non-responders (N = 9), before and (B) 48 h after regorafenib therapy. *P < 0.05. well-dif: well-differentiated
Fig. 4ROC analysis of sMICA and the comparison of PFS and OS according to sMICA level. A ROC analysis of sMICA levels for the detection of responders was conducted. B PFS and OS between low and high plasma sMICA level groups were analyzed. C Kaplan–Meier analyses of PFS and OS according to the sMICA levels were conducted. PFS: progression-free survival, OS: overall survival
Fig. 5Association of pharmacokinetics of regorafenib or its active metabolites with efficacy of regorafenib. AUCt and AUCu values of regorafenib, M2, and M5 were analyzed between responders and non-responders